Cell towers 20-50% more costly disguised as trees, clock towers, flagpoles

From chimneys and clock towers to flagpoles and fake trees, Canada’s incumbent wireless providers are increasingly using a variety of disguises to help hide mobile towers and avoid public opposition to potentially obtrusive telecom infrastructure. Industry experts say the rising practice of disguising mobile phone towers as natural or community objects has become a costly but effective way to assuage public opposition to the increasing prevalence of cell towers in communities. Rogers Communications Inc. spokeswoman Leigh-Ann Popek said in an emailed statement that Rogers strives to maintain design standards that fit in with the environment. “We have built tree-like structures, clock towers, flagpoles, light posts and chimney-like structures in order to offer aesthetically appealing solutions in areas that required something different than a traditional type of installation,” Popek said. “We have also blended installations in by matching the colour of the antennas to the building to minimize visual impact,” she said. BCE Inc., which owns Bell Mobility, said in March that it would build 20 towers disguised as trees in the Muskoka, Ont. region. Albert Lee, a spokesman for Bell, said in an emailed statement that the Muskoka tree towers are an extension of a trial the company began in Algonquin Park five years ago. “The Muskoka trees are designed to closely resemble white pines,” Lee said. “It’s part of Bell’s approach to enhance the aesthetics of our cell sites wherever we can.” Duncan Stewart, director for technology, media and telecom at Deloitte Canada, told The Wire Report that disguises for mobile towers are becoming a common way for companies to dampen public opposition to the construction of new cell sites. Stewart said residents often oppose tower sites in their communities because they see them as obstructing views, being visually displeasing, or affecting the flight paths of migratory birds. Health concerns also feed into public opposition. In the U.S., Stewart said, opposition to mobile cell sites has reached “almost crisis proportions” as carriers have been prevented from installing towers vital to their wireless networks. Dennis Gabrick, president and CEO of California-based TreeScapes, said his company builds fake trees that can help protect cellphone towers from public opposition and the forces of nature. “If engineered properly, it’s safe and aesthetically pleasing,” Gabrick said in an interview. Gabrick could not provide an exact price for a tower tree, saying it depends on how dense a company wants its trees. “For instance, for a 65-foot pine tree, I’ve seen as little as 30 limbs on the tree or as many as 120,” he said. “So the cost may be three times as much, but it’s going to be three times more pleasing on the eye.” Gabrick said the installation of trees would amount to 20 to 30 per cent of the cost of a $1-million disguised cell site. Disguised towers are a solution in some cases but not necessarily a cheap one, Jim Johannsson, a spokesman for wireless carrier Telus Communications Co., said in an interview. Johnannsson said disguised towers can be 30 to 50 per cent more expensive than ordinary towers, and that other factors can drive costs higher. “If you’re putting up an antenna in a more remote location, you may actually have to put in a road to get to it,” he said. “If it’s going on the hillside, you may have to secure the hillside itself to support the tower so erosion from water and weather doesn’t put the structure in any kind of jeopardy.” Johannsson said Telus has spent up to $2 million to install a disguised tower in British Columbia. “But they’re typically in the $250,000 to $500,000 range for antennas that are being put up in developed communities,” he said, referring to ordinary cell towers. Carmi Levy, an independent technology analyst, said the cost for a telco to visually blend a tower into its environment is minimal compared to the costs associated with building and maintaining towers or those related to gaining regulatory approvals. “If this relatively small investment allows carriers greater flexibility to put their towers where they want and need them, it’s likely one of the highest return on investments they can make,” he said in an email message to The Wire Report. He said agreeing to disguise a tower can also speed up the regulatory approval process. “Every last is the result of a years-long process that involves an impossibly long—and growing—list of stakeholders. Municipalities, the CRTC, nearby property owners and residents, and even utility companies all have a say in what goes where and in what form,” Levy said. “A tower that blends in with the surroundings is significantly less likely to touch off protests—much less attract any form of attention—than an unadorned, starkly industrial-looking one,” he wrote. Johannsson said most carriers will initially look for cheaper options, which often include mounting towers on rooftops where available. “You use existing tall structures to mount your antennas onto,” he said. “That’s generally one of the first choices. Is there something we can attach the antenna to?” Johannsson said if that option is not available, companies will opt for a monopole, a thick pole onto which antennas can be bolted. He said the monopole option is not attractive and is usually used in areas where appearance is not important. If a more aesthetically appealing design is necessary, Johannsson said, Telus typically turns to a streamlined flagpole design. “But there’s tradeoffs to the smaller flagpole design,” he said, noting that smaller flagpoles limit how many carriers can share a single tower. “There’s a lot of pressure in the industry on carriers to share towers, which we do,” he said. “But when there’s a need to disguise a tower, the disguise may actually limit the capacity of the structure for supporting multiple carrier antennas.” Johannsson said Telus also uses “tripole” towers, which consist of three poles with antennas “shrouded together” at the top, which can be disguised affordably. “You can actually put a decorative cross on the outside, so it’s a religious symbol to the church as well,” he said. “It’s a really popular way to do it.” dgrenier@thewirereport.ca

Cell towers 20-50% more costly disguised as trees, clock towers, flagpoles

News | 04/23/2012 8:10 pm EDT

To keep reading, get a free trial.

Already a Subscriber?

Reuse & Permissions

Inside The Wire Report

Information

Hill Times Publishing

Get in Touch With Us